felix hominum

Turning Palms into Crosses: sermon notes for Palm Sunday

How is it that we turn palms into crosses?  Every year we try our best to take these long strips of palm branch and by some feat of engineering, we turn them into crosses.  We sometimes don’t fully understand what exactly we are doing.  We take these things which are supposed to be instruments of joyfulness and praise for Jesus, and we turn them into crosses, forgetting that this represents the very thing on which Jesus was crucified.  We usually never consider that strange custom that has evolved in the church over the years.  The very same things that are supposed to praise God, are turned against Jesus.  How does this palm branch turn into a cross? 

It is easy to forget, as we wave a little cross, that it is an instrument of death.  We see that palm branch, we turn it into an empty cross, and we conveniently pass over the suffering and death in between.  The cross was not always empty. 

This is the beginning of Holy Week. Today we started with shouts of Hosanna.  Next Sunday is Easter - the day of resurrection and shouts of Alleluia.  But we are not there yet.  Between the shouts of Hosanna and the shouts of Alleluia there is another shout:  “Crucify him, Crucify him.”  "’Why, what evil has he done? I have found in him no ground for the sentence of death; I will therefore have him flogged and then release him.’ But they kept urgently demanding with loud shouts that he should be crucified; and their voices prevailed.”

We have had two sets of readings this morning, each set painting a picture before us.  We started off the morning with a parade and shouts of joy.  The first picture is the “Palm Sunday” picture.  It is all about the crowds welcoming Jesus into Jerusalem with shouts of Hosanna.  The second picture we have today is the “Good Friday” picture.  It is about the same crowds shouting “Crucify Him” and about how Jesus endures the suffering of the Cross.

What do we learn when we see these two pictures side by side?  We learn about love.  In the first picture we learn about how the crowds, and we, love Jesus.  Let’s call that “Palm Sunday” love.  In the second picture we learn about how Jesus loves the crowds – and us.  Let’s call that “Good Friday” love.  These two kinds of love – Palm Sunday love and Good Friday love, show us the difference between how we love, and how God loves. 

(Palm Sunday Love)

First there is the love which the crowds show to Jesus on Palm Sunday.  It is exciting, it is loud and it is a big show.  They welcome Him into Jerusalem with palm branches and songs and shouts of joy:  “Hosanna to the Son of David”.  They are welcoming Jesus as their King into the throne of David.  But within a few days that same crowd turns on Jesus.  When Pilate asks them what they want to do with this Jesus, this King of the Jews, they reply – “Crucify Him”.  What is wrong with this picture?

It is not lack of enthusiasm.  They were enthusiastic when they shouted “Hosanna to the son of David”.   Yet they were just as enthusiastic when they shouted “Crucify Him”.  If we think love is about putting on a big show, or just being enthusiastic, we need to think again.   The crowd was pretty enthusiastic when things were going well for Jesus.  Palm Sunday love is like that.  It loves when there is a good time to be had, and it stops loving when there are bad times to be had.  This way of loving changes with the weather, or with the circumstances. Status, appearance, health, reputation – all these things matter to Palm Sunday love.  Loving a person – any person, including Jesus, means you love them regardless of their circumstances.   You can love the person, or you can love the things around the person.   The crowds didn’t love the person of Jesus.  They loved the show, the power, the miracles, the idea that this man would be their king. 

It is a test of our love for any person – including God – whether we love them just for who they are, or we love them because of the stuff around them.  Not many people were left loving Jesus when he was being crucified, when everything glamorous and exciting was gone from him.  Jesus died alone.

Is love about being “happy”, whatever we think that word means?  The Palm Sunday crowd is very happy to have Jesus around.  But they are also just as happy to have Him crucified.  This is the more difficult part of the problem.  Love is not about the crowds being happy.  And love is not about me being happy.  Too often we think that it is.  We think that love is supposed to be there for my sole benefit – that love is there to make me happy.  Palm Sunday love is self-serving.  It says “I don’t care what happens to you, as long as I am happy – that is what matters.”  It says “I will love you as long as I get something out of it.”  My happiness is the supreme goal of life.  And this kind of love says – “I will love you for as long as it is convenient for me, for as long as I am getting something out of it, as long as you make me happy – I will love you.”

It is a test of our love for God and for each other.  Do we still love when we are not “getting something out of it?”  Do I love only when it makes me happy?  Am I more concerned about my own happiness than the happiness of the person I am supposed to be loving?  Love is not self-centered or self-serving.


(Good Friday Love)

Now let us think about the Good Friday picture.  What do we think we are seeing when we get a picture of the crucifixion of Jesus?  Do we think we are seeing a man suffering?  Yes, but more than that.  Do we think we are seeing the fulfillment of prophecy?  Yes, and more than that?  We are seeing a picture of love.  On Palm Sunday we see a picture of our love for God, on Good Friday we see a picture of God’s love for us.

How is Jesus’ love for us, different from our love for Him?

Six centuries before Jesus was born, the prophet Isaiah wrote some words describing the Messiah that God was going to send.  Here are the words Isaiah wrote about the Messiah who would come, and what that Messiah would be like:

I gave my back to those who struck me, and my cheeks to those who pulled out the beard; I did not hide my face from insult and spitting.  The Lord GOD helps me; therefore I have not been disgraced; therefore I have set my face like flint.

“I have set my face like flint”.   

What does that tell us about Jesus’ character? About his love?  It tells us about his determination.  He has a strength of willpower that says – I will do what I need to do.  Jesus shows us that the foundation of love is commitment.  He set his face like flint – against everything that will come his way.  
We get enthusiastic – but Jesus gets determined.  Good Friday love means commitment.  It means commitment regardless of the  circumstances.  Jesus is committed to us when the circumstances change.  He loves us when we are shouting “Hosanna” and he loves us when we are shouting “Away with this man.”  Jesus loves us when that love is not returned.  He loves us regardless of how we treat him.  He simply loves us.  He is not merely enthusiastic about loving us when things are great; he is committed to loving us when things are darkest, for us and for him.  He loves us when we shout “Crucify Him, Crucify Him.”   That is not only the darkest moment for Jesus.  It is also the darkest moment for us – when we cry out in rebellion against God.

How does Jesus react to our treatment of him?  How did he react then?  “I gave my back to those who struck me, and my cheeks to those who pulled out the beard; I did not hide my face from insult and spitting.”   How does God react to our treatment of Him?  He puts up with it; he endures it – remember Jesus prayed while he was being led away for crucifixion – “Father forgive them, they do not know what they are doing”.  What happens when love faces a challenge?  That is when love is tested.  That is when we see what love is really made of  - is it Palm Sunday love, or is it Good Friday love?   That is when Jesus is tested.  Jesus prays forgiveness. 

(Self sacrifice, rather than self service)

Whose happiness is Jesus concerned about as he is being crucified?  His own, or someone else’s?   Jesus is willing to endure suffering, and insults, and even death, for the sake of someone else’s happiness – yours and mine.  He did not turn back from suffering because he loved us.  Good Friday love is willing to endure the wrongs of others, to put its own happiness second place, for the sake of someone else.  We have nothing that we can give to God.  God is not in this for what “He can get out of it”.  He is “in it” because He loves us. 

Jesus’ attitude and his actions are not changed by other people’s reactions to him.  Our love is often changed by other people’s attitudes and reactions.  It is part of the “what do I get out of it” syndrome.  Jesus’ love for us does not depend on how well we treat him.  Look at what happens to him.  And look how he reacts.

How do we get this new kind of love?  At best, most of us are caught between the two kinds of love – we perhaps admire the Good Friday love, but more often than not we practice the Palm Sunday love.  Good Friday love is great to see – in other people.   How do we grow in our love and move from one to the other?   Not by struggling to be better, or by making new resolutions to be a better person, or through he myriads of self help books that line the shelves of secular and sacred book shops.  It is a gift, as everything from God is.  It is the highest and best gift of all the gifts of the Spirit – and it is the only gift which will last. For that gift, let us pray.

Commemoration of John Donne

Holy sonnet XIV

Batter my heart, three-person'd God ; for you
As yet but knock ; breathe, shine, and seek to mend ;
That I may rise, and stand, o'erthrow me, and bend
Your force, to break, blow, burn, and make me new.
I, like an usurp'd town, to another due,
Labour to admit you, but O, to no end.
Reason, your viceroy in me, me should defend,
But is captived, and proves weak or untrue.
Yet dearly I love you, and would be loved fain,
But am betroth'd unto your enemy ;
Divorce me, untie, or break that knot again,
Take me to you, imprison me, for I,
Except you enthrall me, never shall be free,
Nor ever chaste, except you ravish me.

 

He died on March 31, 1631.

Pants on fire: the three temptation of Jesus

Matthew 4: 1-11

4:1 Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil.  4:2 He fasted forty days and forty nights, and afterwards he was famished.  4:3 The tempter came and said to him, "If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread."  4:4 But he answered, "It is written, 'One does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.'"

4:5 Then the devil took him to the holy city and placed him on the pinnacle of the temple,  4:6 saying to him, "If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down; for it is written, 'He will command his angels concerning you,' and 'On their hands they will bear you up, so that you will not dash your foot against a stone.'"  4:7 Jesus said to him, "Again it is written, 'Do not put the Lord your God to the test.'"

4:8 Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor;  4:9 and he said to him, "All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me."  4:10 Jesus said to him, "Away with you, Satan! for it is written, 'Worship the Lord your God, and serve only him.'"

4:11 Then the devil left him, and suddenly angels came and waited on him.

 

At the beginning of the Lenten season we look at the story of Jesus’ temptation in the wilderness.  A story like our own, and yet unlike.  It is like our own in that we are all tempted; it is unlike our own in that we, unlike Jesus, fall short.  In this story from Matthew’s Gospel, we see Jesus being “tempted’ or tested by the devil – the spiritual being who is the chief of all that wishes to oppose God.  Jesus faces three temptations – each one somewhat different, and each one having something in common.

 

4:1 Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil.  4:2 He fasted forty days and forty nights, and afterwards he was famished.

Before we begin, let’s just set the context a bit:  Jesus has just come from his baptism, where God has declared:  “this is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased”.  The Spirit has descended upon him, and it is said that he was “led up by the Spirit” into this wilderness place.  The declaration that Jesus is the Son of God is the voice in the background;  the voice in the foreground is the that of Satan.  The first two tempations begin by questioning the truth of the voice heard at Jesus' baptism - "if you are the Son of God".  Temptation begins by questioning not only the voice of God, but our identiy in God.

The First Temptation:

4:3 The tempter came and said to him, "If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread."

What is this temptation about?  Jesus is, quite naturally, probably a fair bit hungry after a time of fasting in the wilderness.  Fasting is a difficult spiritual discipline to practice because we are so accustomed to taking care of our physical needs. To intentionally deny our physical selves is at best, (we tend to think), counter intuitive, and often downright unnatural.   There are really two parts to this temptation:  first is just the temptation for Jesus to break his discipline of fasting – after all, to satisfy our physical selves is the first thing we often think of.  The second part of the temptation is to “command” the stones to instantly become bread – to force it to happen, to take a shortcut from the spiritual discipline of fasting and just give in and eat.  But there are no shortcuts in the spiritual life.

4:4 But he answered, "It is written, 'One does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.'"  Of course Jesus answers by quoting the Scriptures:  What we have in Matthew’s gospel is only the first part of the quotation from Deuteronomy.  The full quote, as I’m sure you remember, goes like this:

“He humbled you by letting you hunger, then by feeding you with manna, with which neither you nor your ancestors were acquainted, in order to make you understand that one does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of the Lord” 

What kind of answer does this give? Jesus is reminding us that we have physical needs (which certainly are important) but we also have spiritual needs.  We are body and soul – we are physical and spiritual creatures.  To feed only our bodies, without feeding our spirits, is a temptation.  This season of Lent invites us to consider how we nourish our hearts, how we “live by every word that comes from the mouth of God”.  It invites us also to listen – it is hard to hear the word of God until we still the background noise in our lives.  On what do we live?:  bread alone, or by the word of God?  In a sense this temptation encompasses all material and physical temptations.  It seeks to define the human as merely the physical.

The Second Temptation:

4:5 Then the devil took him to the holy city and placed him on the pinnacle of the temple,

4:6 saying to him, "If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down; for it is written, 'He will command his angels concerning you,' and 'On their hands they will bear you up, so that you will not dash your foot against a stone.'"

Now the story gets a little more complicated.  The devil takes Jesus up to the Temple, and while there are there he decides to throw in some passages of Scripture as well.

If we consider just the setting for this temptation, it should give us pause.  For in the progression of these three temptations, this is the one located at the place of worship.  The Temple was the particular place of ancient worship, the place of the Holy of Holies – and yet at the very pinnacle of the Temple, there is temptation.  I suspect that things have not changed all that much in the last 2000 years.  There is as much temptation in the church as there is on any streetcorner on the Vegas strip – and maybe more.  One can always want to use the things of God for one’s own purposes.  The church is not immune from temptation, and its offspring – sin.  Temptation can take place in the ancient temple and in the sanctuary of the contemporary church.  Temptation to both of the other things:  failure to pay attention to the matters of the heart, and the desire for power – to have things my way.  The church is not immune from all the temptations which beset any other group of individuals who gather together.

But what is the particular form of the temptation here in Matthew’s gospel?  Prove that you are who you say you are, and prove something about this “word that proceeds from the mouth of God”.  After all, it is written that God will do these things for you.   4:7 Jesus said to him, "Again it is written, 'Do not put the Lord your God to the test.'"  Here is a fundamental form of spiritual temptation  - using the things of God for our own purposes

The Third Temptation:

4:8 Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor;  4:9 and he said to him, "All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me."  4:10 Jesus said to him, "Away with you, Satan! for it is written, 'Worship the Lord your God, and serve only him.'"

Next we have a temptation to power and authority over others for one’s own purposes, and through wrong means.  Power in and of itself is not the temptation.  The temptation comes in when one asks:  how will this power be gained?  What price am I willing to pay to get that power over others, and all the temporary glory that comes with it?  “This will be yours, if you worship me.”  The temptation here is told in its largest form – all the kingdoms of the world.  But we can all fall into this temptation in our own little worlds – the desire to use power and authority unjustly over anyone in our sphere – whether that be in business, or even in our own families.  The temptation to get and use power over others  is of course the opposite of what Jesus exemplifies in his life – instead, as we follow the gospel story, we see that Jesus ends powerless according to the kingdoms of this world, and one of his last acts is of servanthood – as he washes the feet of his disciples.  It doesn’t matter how big or small our kingdom is – it might be an empire, it might be an office, it might be a living room – we all are tempted to have unjust power over others.

Liar, liar, pants on fire:

There is, as well, a pattern in this temptation which is common to all temptation:  do we assume that the devil is telling the truth in this story?  And the devil said to him, "To you I will give their glory and all this authority; for it has been given over to me, and I give it to anyone I please.  4:7 If you, then, will worship me, it will all be yours."

Is that true?  Is it really the devil’s to give away?  “The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof”, says the psalm.   And Jesus reminds Pilate “you would have no authority over me had it not been given you from above”.  Notice Jesus doesn't say "from below".  My point is this:  Satan here acts as if these things are completely at his disposal, as if he has the power to take and give as he wishes.  But this is not actually the case.  So what we have in this temptation is a lie, masquerading as truth.  The world is God’s – God is the one in charge here, not the devil.

It is a lie – a false promise.  And this lie is at the heart of every temptation.  You see, temptation promises to deliver something that it actually has no power to deliver.  Like the first story of temptation in the garden of Eden, when they were told – you will not die, you will be like God.

This is the heart of temptation - it holds before our eyes something which, in the end, it cannot truly give us.  Unmasking the lie in all temptation is a diffucult but necessary part of spiritual maturity.

sermon notes Epiphany 8, Year A, Matthew 6:24-34

Every year the American Psychological Association adds to the growing list of anxiety disorders which seem to be popping up.  The phobia list is a handy reference guide for anything which might cause you to worry.  Here are just a few to get you started:

Atomic Explosions- Atomosophobia

Bridges or of crossing them- Gephyrophobia.

Chopsticks- Consecotaleophobia

Mother-in-law- Pentheraphobia

Ablutophobia- Fear of washing or bathing.

 

In today’s Gospel reading Jesus addresses the question of fear and anxiety and worry by pointing out three things to avoid, and two things to desire:  Don’t be worrying about food/ clothing/ and tomorrow;  instead seek God’s kingdom and God’s righteousness:

[31] Therefore do not worry, saying, 'What will we eat?' or 'What will we drink?' or 'What will we wear?'

[32] For it is the Gentiles who strive for all these things; and indeed your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things.

[33] But strive first for the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.

 

While there is a tendency to think primarily in terms of trusting (trusting God vs trusting wealth), Jesus begins by talking about serving.  The language used to set the scene is one of servitude or slavery.  Trust involves choice, but slavery involves no choice - it is forced upon you.  What we are faced with is not a decision as to whether or not we will serve a master, but only what kind of master we will serve.  And Jesus wants to prod the fence sitters: 

[24] "No one can serve two masters; for a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth.  [25] Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing?

"a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other."  There does not seem to be much middle ground there.  Can God and wealth be so opposed?  Well, perhaps not, but serving God and serving wealth certainly are.

It was one of the characteristics of the Roman Emperors that they would keep the people in perpetual anxiety over the necessities of life in order to get their allegiance and obedience.  But Jesus says that God’s kingship does not work that way.  God is not interested in keeping us in perpetual anxiety and worry, rather, He wants to free us from anxiety and worry: “do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink”.

Someone I read pointed out that we can trust Jesus to take away our sins and give us eternal life, but we have trouble trusting him for the next sandwich.  Says a lot, doesn't it?

Jesus gives us a roundabout question: “Isn’t life more than food and clothing?” -  of course we are supposed to agree with him that "life is more than food, and the body more than clothing".  But we are then faced with the question:  what is the "more"?  Have you ever found yourself asking – is this it?  What the "more" is will be told in verse 33.  But for now we are told what we are to avoid:  worrying about life in terms of food, drink and clothing.  In a society whose advertising industry is built on the foundation of worry, this is either a frightening or a freeing message.  Think of the collect for morning prayer (BCP): "whose service is perfect freedom".

[26] Look at the birds of the air; they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they?  [27] And can any of you by worrying add a single hour to your span of life? [28] And why do you worry about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they neither toil nor spin, [29] yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not clothed like one of these.  [30] But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which is alive today and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you--you of little faith?

So how does Jesus propose we stop our worrying?  Jesus turns our attention not to the negative characteristics of "wealth", but to the positive characteristics of God.  It is interesting how his persuasion proceeds.  He does not preach here against the evils of wealth or possessions.  Instead, Jesus asks us to consider the character of God, our "heavenly Father."  This is the true starting point, and a good lesson in apologetics:  begin with the goodness of God, rather than with the fault of that which you are trying to condemn. 

Secondly, we are invited to consider ourselves in terms of realizing that we are worth something to God – look at the birds of the air;  “are you not of more value than they?” We might tend to slip over this verse, perhaps out of a fear of  - oh I don't know -  thinking too highly of ourselves or something like that.  Fair enough;  there is more than enough back-patting in Christian circles;  why do we need an affirmation or mini-course in self esteem at this point?  Jesus asks us to consider, really consider, that we have value in God's eyes.  I wonder if this is more connected with the preceding thought:  our value in God's eyes is due to the goodness of His character, rather than of ours.

[31] Therefore do not worry, saying, 'What will we eat?' or 'What will we drink?' or 'What will we wear?'  [32] For it is the Gentiles who strive for all these things; and indeed your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things.  [33] But strive first for the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.  [34] So do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will bring worries of its own. Today's trouble is enough for today."

 

 

 

 

 

Here we have the goal and purpose of the church – to seek God’s kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you as well.

What are our priorities? – as individuals and as a community?

Have we ever done anything which requires us to trust God?

 

There is a good deal of food for thought when this gospel passage is heard alongside Isaiah:

They shall feed along the ways, on all the bare heights shall be their pasture;  they shall not hunger or thirst, neither scorching wind nor sun shall strike them down, for he who has pity on them will lead them, and by springs of water will guide them...But Zion said, "The LORD has forsaken me, my Lord has forgotten me." Can a woman forget her nursing child, or show no compassion for the child of her womb? Even these may forget, yet I will not forget you.  See, I have inscribed you on the palms of my hands.

 

 

 

The question about what we shall eat and drink takes can take on a new meaning when heard in the context of communion.  With what do we feed our souls?  There is a marvellous answer to that question for those who hold to a higher view of the sacramental grace offered to us in the Eucharist.

HUSA - our latest support project

We were grateful to have Sarah Pollock join us last Sunday to talk about her work with HUSA, a grassroots organization which does great work in Tanzania.  Sarah is a nursing student at the U of A who caught a vision and is making it happen.  Here are some snippets from HUSA's hompage:

Currently HUSA Center for Children is caring for 49 children between the ages of 3-16 years. Thanks to our gracious supporters, the children are recieving 3 meals a day, have a rented shelter and are all attending primary school, vocational training or tutoring sessions.
Although great achievements have been made with the center, more is needed. The current rented house is in need of repairs and is not large enough to accomadate beds for all the children. By 2012, it is our goal to have built a new home with a small farm to help sustain the center finacially. To see our goals and plans click here. 

Vision:
To become a reputable Community Based Organization (CBO) that is
responsive to providing care and support to children and youth orphaned
by HIV/AIDS in the Kimamba, Kilosa region of Tanzania.
 
Mission:
To provide quality care and support to orphans in Kimamba. 
 
Objectives:
1.        Provide prompt and quality assistance to orphaned children in Kimamba.
2.        Stabilize the children’s psychological and social well being.
3.        To raise awareness and decrease stigma towards HIV/AIDS within Kimamba, by providing            education and participating in community awareness groups.
4.        Reach the children before the parents die to plan for the child’s future.
5.        Support each HUSA child through their school education.

 

my dinner with Catholics (nor ever chaste, except thou ravish me)

A post by Scott Bader-Saye drew my attention to an article in which Pope Benedict laments the use of sacro-pop in worship.  The article is well worth the read, and makes some interesting points.  The standard quote is that much of contemporary church music is of the "Jesus is my girl/boyfriend" variety.

Some time ago I had dinner with Catholics.  I am distanced enough from the event to be able to fully digest it.  At one point the topic of conversation turned to priestly celibacy and all things related thereto.  To my surprise, I discovered that none of the other guests had read much (if any) of the catholic thinkers and poets of years gone by.  There was a great deal of consternation when it was discovered that (for example) the medievals saw a connection between romantic and divine love.  As had thoughful persons before them.

Those who have followed this writer's offerings over the course of some time have probably come to realize that I believe Dante has a bit of wisdom to impart.  Not the least of this is the relationship between the romantic and the divine.  In our day and age, we tend to collapse the two:  as a culture we think that anything romantic must in and of itself also be divine.  And so, in reaction to this error, when we run across the romantic in contemporary christian music, others of us may tend to think that it must be rebuffed.  After all, such familiarity offends the transcendence of God, and tends to elevate human feelings or emotions to the level of the divine.

I suspect that underneath the admittedly banal lyrics of much contemporary christian pop music is a truth yet to be articulated.  We need a John Donne to tear up their lyric sheets and give them a seminar.  God is his lover.

 

Yet dearly I love you, and would be loved fain,
But am betroth'd unto your enemy ;
Divorce me, untie, or break that knot again,
Take me to you, imprison me, for I,
Except you enthrall me, never shall be free,
Nor ever chaste, except you ravish me.

excerpt, Holy Sonnet XIV

 

Book Review: John H Armstrong: Your Church is Too Small

Your Church Is Too Small
Why Unity in Christ's Mission Is Vital to the Future of the Church
John H Armstrong
Zondervan, 2010
220 pages

One of my first memories of campus ministry takes me back to a scene during orientation week at a major university.  I took some time to wander through the vast array of displays in the school's athletic center.  All of the various group and clubs and organizations on campus had their wares set up in assorted booths and tables and such.  I had just arrived as the new person for Anglican campus ministry in a university of over 35,000 students.  I thought it would be a good thing to check out the variety of Christian groups on campus - each one having it's own location in the campus agora to recruit new students and proclaim their message.

Now don't get me wrong.  I didn't lament the presence of so many different Christian groups on the campus.  But that very first day on the job I was struck with the thought of what might happen if all these groups had some way of uniting.  And so I was moved to do what was perhaps almost unthinkable for an Anglican in such a setting.  I went around to all of the Christian displays and asked the students and leaders staffing them if we could gather the Christians together, even for a few minutes, for prayer.  Right there, in the middle of the athletic center, buzzing with thousands of students.

I start with a story  from the past because that is where Armstrong starts.  He comes from a Reformed tradition, and he has been influenced by the ecumenical work of people like John Mott and Leslie Newbigin.  His book begins with a look at two histories;  his own and that of the church.  In his own life and work he began what he calls a "journey to catholicity".  He takes his starting points from Scripture (Jesus' prayer for unity in John 17) and from the common witness of the early church as expressed in the Apostles' Creed.  These, for Armstrong, served as benches upon which he can sit with Christians from other traditions.

As Armstrong comes from a confessional Reformed tradition, it is easy to see how his passion for unity can be seen by some withing his tradition as compromise at best and dangerous pluralism at worst.  I think all of us who have been involved in some such activity on a real level run up against this.  The fuller unity is not one in which we merely hang out with Christians from other places or denominations whose doctrines or practices are close to our own.  That is merely associating with the like-minded or the like-practiced.  Which is why, by the way, I have often found that many "Ecumenical" events are rather predictable.  They can sometimes merely be the getting together of similar people from different traditions.

I suspect Armstrong would strongly reject a charge of compromise simply because he has been searching for that early common ground.  Biblically, it is Jesus' prayer;  confessionally, it is the creed; practically, it is mission-ecumenism.  At heart of course, it is Christ himself.  As Armstrong points out, the quickest route between two Christians goes through Christ Himself.

Can the church's past act as guide for unity in the present?  Armstrong suggests that the 4 classical marks of "The Church" - one, holy, catholic, apostolic - can at least be a framework upon which contemporary Christians might build bridges over their differences. Currently there are tens of thousands of Christian denominations, independent churches and sects in North America.  Somehow each one thinks it has an understanding of what it means to be the Church.  In order to address the question of unity in the present, Armstrong looks at the roots of disunity in church history, as well as some of the current thinking that has supported the particularly Protestant pastime of splitting congregations and starting new "churches".

At heart (though Armstrong devotes only a few pages to it) is the Cartesian revolution of looking at the self as the source of certainty.  Here I want to draw out some points that Armstrong makes in broad terms.  Opposing the "self" there is the classical understanding of God as Trinity.  My sense is that once we are moved by the the unity and diversity which is the Trinity, we will have a better chance of finding the path to unity and diversity incarnated in the visible church. While we might want to go back in a romantic sense to the unity of the early church, we cannot.  First, that unity was not without its difficulties and factions.  Second (and here I am stealing a thought from Pete Rollins) it is not to the early church that we must return, but to the Person and Event which gave birth to the early church.  So our present quest for unity, while we wrestle with practices and doctrines, traditions and Scriptures, must go back, eventually, to God himself as Trinity.

So where does the path go from here?  For Armstrong, the church of the future needs to be missional-ecumenical. I know, I know:  can you pack two buzzwords from different ends of the spectrum together and not have a mess of pottage at the end?  Fortunately, Armstrong brings these two terms together with content (accent on the first syllable).  Here I think I'll return to that episode of days gone by.  Over the course of that year, the students and leaders of various Christian groups on campus tried to covenant to meet together regularly for prayer.  We would take turns leading the prayer times, which in itself was a learning experience for many.  As the year went along, we sensed that the places in which could really cooperate actively were in the areas of mission.  This is the point of the exercise:  to work together in Christ's mission to the world.  I have personally found that ecumenism which tends to focus solely on having a smorgasboard worship service, cobbling together external pieces from various traditions, often misses the point and the power of the Kingdom.  Armstrong encourages us toward relational and cooperative unity in mission as a place where the Church, in all its fullness, can begin to exhibit the unity for which Christ prayed.

Overall - A good basic intro to a newer and more robust ecumenism.  Easy to read, questions at the end of each chapter for discussion.  Lots to think about, act about, and of course, to argue about amongst ourselves.

Notice:  This book has been provided courtesy of Graf-Martin Communications, Inc and the author. Available now at your favourite bookseller.

Neighourhoods, God, & stuff

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YaXbkD1sgs

Event Focus: "The Word became flesh and moved into the neighbourhood." (John 1:14 - The Message) As followers of Jesus, we are called into neighbourhoods. Forge Canada is seeking to inspire and to equip a movement of God's people to participate in neighbourhood transformation. Come and be a part of this day with folks from across the city who are seeking to be obedient to God and participate with God in kingdom activities in their neighbourhoods. Michael Frost, author, speaker, teacher from Australia, will lead a team of people who will inspire us to a new vision of the people of God living out their faith in the context of their neighbourhood.

Register/ more info here from Forge.

stitches on the face of Christ

It's lunchtime & have a 1 month backlog of bits and pieces that I had been working on to post. I'm currently deep in caffeine due to a late night getting back from emerg with son #1.  He had done what most young boys do on a regular basis - given himself a small injury through being extremely boyish.  A small cut under the chin - big enough to require a few stitches, but not big enough to move too quickly to the front of the line.

It started with a trip to the neighbourhood medicentre yesterday evening.  Mrs Felix thought that it would only take a few minutes.  I'm amazed though, at the capacity of a six and a half year old to fend off the advances of 3 medical professionals brandishing instruments of healing.  We had thought of calling the zoo to get some elephant tranquilizer darts, but they were closed for the evening.  He was smart, though;  he knew that if he resisted long enough he would eventually force the clinic to close - sort of like running down the clock at the end of a football game, and the operation would have to be abandoned.  Eventually the clinic did close, with little progress made.  So off I drove to the emergency room to wait with the cross section of humanity that shows up in such places after 10 pm.  4 hours later we were free, and fairly tired, and heading home again to catch our 4.5 hours of sleep.  All in a day's parenting...

Earlier this week we celebrated the "Feast of St Timothy" - the patron saint of our church.  The readings for the main service included Paul's famous description of the church as the "body of Christ" - made up of its many parts and members.  Normally on such festive occasions we tend to emphasize how we all participate in this marvellous thing "The Church", and give ourselves a pep talk of encouragement and enthusiasm to respond to the tasks and vocations laid before us.

But this year we had a slightly different focus.  It's not there explicitly in the passage we read from Corinthians, but it is there nonetheless:  the body of Christ is wounded.  We tend not to address such things openly in the church, yet it is integral to who Christ is, and therefore integral to those who wish to be part of his body.  What I mean is this:  when we look at the story of 'doubting Thomas' for instance, we can see that the place where he connects with, becomes intimate with, becomes convinced by Christ is in His wounds.

The image of Thomas being invited to touch the wounds of Christ is a significant and necessary part of what we like to call 'conversion'.  It is vital - 'life-giving' - that Christ makes this the invitational point of contact: place yourself in my wounds, for they are healed, but they are still wounds.  It is really only there that Thomas will be, not convinced only, but converted.  And so I think it necessary for us as well to approach the wounds of Christ, and accept His invitation to "touch him" in those places.

We seldom invite people to such a Christ.  We invite them to a glorified Christ, a teaching Christ, an ethical Christ, a loving Christ, a victorious Christ.  We seldom invite them to a wounded Christ.  Yet I am more and more persuaded that all of us within the church, and all of us outside the Church, need to touch the wounds of Christ.

The annual Boxing Day Ritual...

You know, the one where we bring Jesus back to God and ask to exchange him for something more comfortable, or better yet, just give us the cash.

Bartimaeus, the question of vision, & what I have on my nightstand

It is by that, more than anything, that a man is judged.

-Charles' father, speaking of "the wearing of tall hats on Sunday", in Brideshead Revisited.  

I do have a tall hat (the proper finish to a morning coat and crevat), although I have to confess that it has been some time since it wore it on a Sunday. Instead, I propose we judge a man by what he has on his nightstand.  It is here that you will find a man's character:  his ambitions and his failings.  Rather than have human resources departments administer all sorts of psychological tests, I propose that we simply give them a list of things we have beside our beds.  That will show them the true state of our lives.  I would have given a full list of what is beside mine, only it toppled over in a Babelesque display a few days ago.  So now I just get up on the other side of the bed.  All of this does give me a chance to go through and catalogue the assorted things I've been reading over the past month.  1984 (Orwell), The Odyssey (Homer, not Simpson), Truth and Method (Gadamer), Simply Christian (NT Wright), MIssion Shaped Parish, and a few other odds and ends, not least of which is the autobiography of MIles Davis.

Over the last few weeks I've been struck again by the story of Bartimaeus.  I read it and preached on it in the past, but it has stayed with me.  I have found myself returning to it from time to time. It is the story of vision.

Mark 10: 46-52

Then they came to Jericho. As Jesus and his disciples, together with a large crowd, were leaving the city, a blind man, Bartimaeus (that is, the Son of Timaeus), was sitting by the roadside begging.  When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!"  Many rebuked him and told him to be quiet, but he shouted all the more, "Son of David, have mercy on me!"

Jesus stopped and said, "Call him." So they called to the blind man, "Cheer up! On your feet! He's calling you." Throwing his cloak aside, he jumped to his feet and came to Jesus.

"What do you want me to do for you?" Jesus asked him. 
The blind man said, "Rabbi, I want to see."

"Go," said Jesus, "your faith has healed you." Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.  

We don't know the cause of Bartimaeus' blindness, but at least we know this, and so does Bartimaeus:  he knew that this was not the way God intended him to be.  He knew something was wrong.  He somehow knew what it was to see, though now he only knows what it is to be blind.   

The beginning of vision is the recognition of the need for Jesus;  vision begins with repentance. And then comes the choice:  to listen to the crowds who rebuke, or to keep seeking the vision which comes from Jesus.  I love Bart's reaction when he learns that Jesus is calling him - he jumps to his feet.  Would that all our responses to God's call were the same - an eagerness to be part of what Christ is doing in the world.  

Much of what I've been reading in the last little while has to do with vision: a vision for society & community;  a vision for humanity;  a vision of ourselves;  and a vision of Christ.

"What do you want me to do for you?" Jesus asked him. 
The blind man said, "Rabbi, I want to see."

Twitter: "Connection without Expectation" ://church

I heard a fascinating interview a few days ago on CBC radio.  The guest was relating some comments from the founder(s) of Twitter.  For those not in the 140 character loop, let's just say that if you are reading this you are only a click away from discovering what it is.  The interviewee related a story about the early days of the Twitter concept.  Why did these entrepreneurs think their idea would fly?  The answer was simple:  people today are looking for "connection without expectation".  This is exactly what Twitter (and in some ways its big brother Facebook) can provide in endless measure.  In a form of Newspeak, "friend" can mean either your lifelong companion or someone to give you an energy boost in Mafia Wars, or help raise your vegetables in Farmville, or simply someone who signed onto some cause you promoted, without the slightest intention of actually participating.

This idea of "connection without expectation" is one of the problems of the contemporary church.  From a marketing point of view it is a great guiding principle for our outreach and evangelism and whatever else you want to throw in the pot.  Seen from the vantage point of creating real Christian community, however, it is problematic.  We always run the risk of becoming (or remaining - take your pick) aloof, independent and alone.  "Connection" finds its illusory power in some vague sense of the word, without the expectation that connection with another human being in community involves care, love, friendship.  

It is interesting that one of the readings for this coming Sunday in church is from the Genesis story of the creation of man/woman.  It is the story of the first human community.

Adam.  Eve.

God.

Add as Friend.

St Tim's Vacation Bible Camp!! woo hoo!!

St Tim's Vacation Bible Camp (Aug 17-21, ages 3-11) registration and info is available to download:

St Tim's VBC (pdf)

St Tim VBC (MS Word)

Can one be a moderate Christian?

The path Alyosha chose was a path going in the opposite direction, but he chose it with the same thirst for swift achievement. As soon as he reflected seriously he was convinced of the existence of God and immortality, and at once he instinctively said to himself:  “I want to live for immortality, and I will accept no compromise.”

Brothers Karamazov, chapter 5

I was reading an account of some debate in which one of the parties was described as a "moderate Catholic".  The more I thought about the phrase, the more curious it appeared to me.  Of course we routinely apply the adjective "moderate" to any number of affiliations;  it is a prized possession in some circles, you know - nothing too extreme.  But my curious thought is this.  It seems to me that Catholic (or Anglican or whatever you will) is a subset of Christian.  And to apply the term "moderate" in any sense to anything which is a subset of Christian is a mistake.  Can one be a 'moderate' Christian in any sense that bears the weight of the name itself? Can one be moderate about anything which bears the name of Christ?

In the same way, if he had decided that God and immortality did not exist, he would at once have become an atheist and a socialist.  [ibid]

From the Comments...

In case you missed it:  anthony made the following comment

joe:

if i find a man daft enough to marry me, i am assuming you will not officiate. why?

Fair question, deserving of a fair answer.  I've known anthony for a few years, consider him a friend, (he is also a fellow blogger on my link list) and yet I would have to say that I've not been convinced that the sacrament of marriage in the Church is to be offered to same gender couples.  A starting point in the "why" would, for me, be Jesus' reiteration of the intention of the institution of marriage in the creation narratives:  man and woman, in their created difference, come to a unity which is not merely symbolized by their physical difference and union, but is incarnated in that physical difference and union.

That being said, (and there is more to say on the nature of the sacrament of marriage), anthony:  if you do find someone daft enough to marry you, I'm looking forward to receiving an invitation, and let me know where you are registered.

An address to the Canadian Prayer Book Society

This afternoon I had the honour of being the featured speaker at the annual general meeting of the Prayer Book Society of Canada.  Here is the basic content of the talk I delivered.  I'm sure there are typos, missing sentences,  and errors of a more substantial nature which you may feel free to bring to my attention.  There was a Q&A afterward, some of which I'll add later.  Some of my readers will have heard bits and pieces of our story elsewhere;  some has appeared here, other bits are public for the first time. 

Here is part one.  Part two will follow in a few days, or when I have time. 
Tomorrow is mother's day...

Thanksgiving After Childbirth:  Choosing Sarah Joy in an Age of Options

A Starting Point: 

O lord open thou our lips,
And our mouth shall show forth thy praise.

We are blessed with 4 children – 2 girls and 2 boys –. They range in age from 10 years to 3 years.  Needless to say, our fridge is awash with artwork, our yard is littered with various signs of the small armies passing through, and we have over the past number of years come up with our own “Liturgy for the Blessing of A Minivan” to commemorate this particular stage of parenthood.  I consider myself an accomplished liturgist, and so I thought I would treat the PBSC to a small sample of my work:

LITURGY:

The Community gathers around the BMV.  All should be dressed appropriately;  children should be wearing freshly laundered items, preferably white or light colours.  At no time are the responses to be said or sung in unison: a random senseless chattering is preferred.
The presider (“One”) begins with the ancient latin three-fold form of the “Itemus”.

One:   Here we go, here we go, here we go.
All:      Are we there yet?

The procession leading into the BMV begins, led by the pater familias, children are strapped into various seats, but not in such a way as to imply that their auto-nomous freedom is in any way compromised.  Such an act of contraint  by the pater familias is a remnant of patriarchal power imbalance, and must be recognized as such.

The Prayer of Transport:

We come before you, and indeed even enter into your most inward self, O blessed mode of travel.  We come in the weakness of our commute, our pilgrim journey amidst the busy rush of life.  It is you, O Mini Van, who carry us beyond our present places of indifference and solitude.  In you alone many may gather and vacation as one; it is through you that all are invited to come and share in the One Ride.  

Now we rejoice in the provision you have made for the perpetuation of middle class lifestyle, through the marketing of the domestic and the union made vehicle.  For it is not the destination, but the consumption along the journey, that gives us meaning.

Beneath your hood is mystery; for in the days of our youth we took an arts degree.  And so we abandon all reason as we enter your sanctuary.

The Great Snack:
At this point the elements of the Great Snack are distributed to the Occupants.   The meal must have a chocolate layer which melts on contact with human flesh.  The drink must be of a deep hue, preferably grape or raspberry.
The Great Snack is distributed, after which follows:

The Breaking of the Peace.
Here all assault their neighbours.

Accusations, Confession, & Counter-Accusations.
One:   May One greater than I help you, if I have to stop this van.
All:      It was his/her/their/its fault.
Chaos ensues; night descends.

There are times when I have come to appreciate the circumstances under which the ancient Canaanites sacrificed their children.

PBSC talk:  what is it not about:  it is not about public policy, or the culture war, although doubtless it has implication for such things.

It is, rather, about a person, it is about coming to see the image of God, looking forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come.  It is about being shaped by a particular kind of Christian Discipleship, and learning, by grace, to grow into that discipleship – not that I have already achieved or am already there, as St Paul would say, but rather to invite and pray that one’s self might be shaped by such a thing.

A Story

In the winter of 2001 I was attending a clergy retreat with my colleagues from the Diocese of Edmonton.  The retreat leader (I forget who it was), finished one of his addresses with reference to one of his favourite Henri Nouwen books;  “Adam”.  “Adam” is the tale of Nouwen’s encounter with a young man who lived with profound disabilities, and how Christ used Adam to tranform Nouwen’s heart in many ways. 

I thought it interesting enough:  I had read some of Nouwen’s work, but not that particular book; maybe I should pick it up someday when I have the time.  I was scheduled to assist with the Communion service to follow the address, and so I sauntered off to see about robes and bread and wine.  On my way I was approached by one of the staff of the retreat center, handing me a message to call home.

I made a what I thought was going to be a casual phone call:  Alisa was pregnant with our second child, and I was now a veteran of what husbands around the world know as the pregnant lady condition:  perhaps I needed to pick up some ice cream and skor bars on the way home.

Alisa told me that she had just come back from what was supposed to be a “routine ultrasound” (I suppose on reflection there is no such thing), and that our second child was showing signs of congestive heart failure in the womb.  It was unclear at that point what the cause was, or if there were other, additional complications and conditions.

I listened, we prayed.  And as I made my way to prepare for Communion, I was struck by a thought which entered my mind, or my heart, or both:  this child will be your “Adam”.

As we made our way through the medical system over the next several weeks, we discovered that there was a great likelihood that this unborn child also had Down Syndrome – a genetic condition.

We live in an age of options:  one which was very quickly presented to us was that of “terminating the pregnancy”, as they say.  The scientific literature on the topic tells us that upwards of 85% of prenatal diagnoses of Down Syndrome result in that option.   In recent years advocacy organizations for persons with Down Syndrome have noted that all too often, information provided to prospective parents by the medical community has been less than adequate.  

Love and Fear:

I suppose looking back now there are several things which informed and shaped and moved us to make the decision we did. 

In an age where the gift of sexuality is often seen as a means of “personal fulfillment only”, we understood that gift to be exercised for a purpose other than the self, and indeed, other than the immediate other  - the beloved.  It is a gift that, in itself, begets a gift. 

Our decision to become parents is the first means of learning what that elusive phrase “unconditional love” really means in the flesh – incarnated.  Indeed, when it comes to prenatal diagnosis, how can one learn of unconditional love if one begins to select the conditions upon which a child’s place in the family and community must depend.?  The Age of Designer babies is almost upon us.  Exercising the gift of sexuality is an invitation to commit to a great unknown in faith.  Most of us do not consider that unknown at the time; at least I know I did not.  But I knew this:  my responsibility as a parent begins with the exercise of the gift of sexuality.

We had no romantic illusions about what parenting this child would mean. It would mean sacrifices – physically, emotionally, perhaps financially. What would this child’s future be? Would be caregivers for the rest of our lives? How would this impact our marriage, our family, our careers?

As we look back, a big part of the choice had to do with the difference between love and fear. I worked in a major Canadian university with a large teaching hospital. I have many friends in professional fields of health care, education and counseling. As we became more educated about Down Syndrome, and got in contact with people in all of those fields, we began to ease the fear that can easily overwhelm parents of children with disabilities.

As we look back on that choice between love and fear, we recall the saying from the Scriptures that “perfect love casts out fear”. We believe that God is on to something there: that so many of our important decisions in life have to do with the choice between love and fear. We could choose to love this child (no matter what), or choose to be afraid of the future, of how this person would change and affect our lives. In choosing to have the baby, we did not think God would magically “rescue” us from difficulties now or in the future, but that he would give us the grace to learn how to love more deeply through whatever the future may hold.

TWO PRAYERS

There are two prayers side by side in the service of Thanksgiving after Childbirth:  Evidently it has been the custom to pray one or the other, but not both: 

O GOD, our heavenly Father, we thank thee and praise thy glorious Name, that thou hast been pleased to bless this thy servant, and to bestow upon her the gift of a child: Grant, we beseech thee, most merciful Father, that she and her husband may diligently lead this child In the way of righteousness, to their own great blessing and the glory of thy Name; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Or the Minister may say:

O GOD whose ways are hidden and thy works most wonderful, who makest nothing in vain and lovest all that thou hast made: Comfort thou thy servants, whose hearts are sore smitten and oppressed; and grant that they may so love and serve thee in this life, that they may obtain the fulness of thy promises in the world to come; through our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

Most, if not all, of parents who discover a very difficult prenatal diagnosis experience some kind of grief.  I am not comparing that grief with the experience of those who have suffered through the death of child, but it is a grief nonetheless.  It is the kind of grief which is renewed at various stages:  upon birth - a mixture of joy and trembling;  it is a grief which shows itself again when other children are learning their first words, taking their first steps;  it is a grief which is renewed on the first day of school, and it is a grief renewed with the first instance of name calling and bullying. 

I found myself in the unexpected posture of praying both of these prayers at once – prayers both of thankfulness and rejoicing, and a sense of grief and sorrow at the way in which human brokenness, the effects of the old fault of Adam in the Garden of Eden, are still echoing through our world, and indeed, continue to echo through our very selves – our souls and bodies. 

And there in the prayers are the things into which we must be shaped:  faith in a God who ways are hidden, and yet whose works are most wonderful;  who makest nothing in vain and lovest all that He has made.  Such a “shaping” is not an easy thing.

Parents of children with disabilities get used to the parade of specialists who become a routine feature of family life.  Some years ago, when SJ was probably about 2, we had a visit from an occupational therapist.  It was a fascinating event.  Apparently the natural position of the hand is clenched, closed.  Opening the hand is actually a learned behavior.  We make the mistake of thinking that it "comes naturally", but that is because for most of us, we do not realize how we are taught to do it.
With SJ, the process was intentional and long, and yes, difficult.  This learning to "ungrasp", this letting go of things to which we cling so fiercely, is not merely a physical difficulty.

Sometimes people can be parables:  Sarah Joy is one of them:  she has become to us a living parable.

As the process continues, one discovers that the best way of teaching the proper motions, is the simple process of hand over hand.  Most of us who are parents have done this in one form or another.  Let me give you an example:  In order to teach Sarah Joy a number of very basic hand movements, we engaged daily in the exercise of hand over hand:  my hand over her hand, opening, closing, reaching, touching. 

It is, for me, an image of a life of Christian discipleship lived under guidance.  For in order to be truly shaped, we must allow the hand of Father to be over our hands, the life of Christ to be over our lives, the finger of the Spirit to over our fingers:  And as we submit to that shaping, we become what we are meant to be. 

It is a liturgical act, as are many things in life.   It is the way of Discipleship of Common Prayer:  we pray these things in order to have the hand of God shape our lives and our hearts.

Choosing Sarah Joy means choosing to be shaped under the hand of God, through a most unlikely messenger.  It means choosing, as Jesus did, not to put out a smouldering wick, or to break a reed that is already bending and bruised.  It is to understand that the Christian’s final hope of healing and redemption of both body and soul is the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come.

Beyond Pro birth to Pro life

As I said at the beginning, this talk is not primarily about policies and culture wars, laws and proclamations, but one may find implications for the Christian in some of the things which I have said.

There is a wonderful American poet by the name of Craig Romkema.  He lives with a number of disabilities.  In one of his collections he writes:

You whose language flows coherently,
whose ideas sparkle like wine on the tongue,
remember your gift
and use it well,
for me.

[From the collection "Embracing the Sky:  Poems Beyond Disability"]

One of the things which separates the community of the intellectually disabled from other communities searching for rights is the great lack of self-advocacy.  Unlike other oppressed minorities, they have few self-advocates.  They do not stage demonstrations or run for parliament.  They do not organize media campaigns or engineer public vocabulary.  They do not file human rights complaints or challenge court cases.

Perhaps because of this, as a church we are woefully behind in bringing the Gospel to bear on the advances in technology.   In an inclusive church where many are looking for "sacramental inclusion", we are perhaps called to speak for those who may not even make it to the baptismal font. – they cannot speak for themselves.  Yet the final word cannot be mere silence, as some of the postmodernists or nihilists would have us believe.  It must be praise:

O GOD, our heavenly Father, we thank thee and praise thy glorious Name, that thou hast been pleased to bless this thy servant, and to bestow upon her the gift of a child: Grant, we beseech thee, most merciful Father, that she and her husband may diligently lead this child In the way of righteousness, to their own great blessing and the glory of thy Name; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen

The answer, I submit, is not to be found in more law; it is to be found in more grace...

[Part Two to follow in a day or two or three..]

what a person with Down Syndrome taught me about sin of grasping

Parents of children with disabilities get used to the parade of specialists who become a routine feature of family life.  Some years ago, when SJ was probably about 2, we had a visit from an occupational therapist.  It was a fascinating event.  Apparently the natural position of the hand is clenched, closed.  Opening the hand is actually a learned behavior.  We make the mistake of thinking that it "comes naturally", but that is because for most of us, we do not realize how we are taught to do it.

With SJ, the process was intentional and long, and yes, difficult.  This learning to "ungrasp", this letting go of things to which we cling so fiercely, is not merely a physical difficulty. 

Sometimes people can be parables.

The rest of the talk: "Thanksgiving After Childbirth:  Choosing Sarah in an Age of Options", will be given on Saturday, May 9 at 2pm (St Tim's church, 8420- 145 St, Edmonton).  It's part of the program of the Canadian National Prayer Book Society AGM.  The talk is open to the public, and in the spirit of common prayer, it's about how one person taught me (and still does teach) many things about the Risen Christ.  I'll post it here sometime afterward.

speakeasy - (minor 7 flat 5)

A few of us who actually enjoy playing jazz are planning to get together on a somewhat regular basis for evenings of semi-freestyle jazz and some readings, images, discussion, and beverages.  I'll get some times and places up when they are confirmed.

Sort of like a speakeasy, with Jesus...

Voices for Habitat for Humanity fundraiser - big thanks

A big thanks to everyone who helped out at the "Voices for Habitat" fundraising concert yesterday evening:  volunteers, donors, musicians, and Tim who did a lot of organizing.  I expect he might have some pics up soon, as I noticed him putting batteries into a camera at one point...

Although all the musicians were excellent, I have to say that the final set by Jeremy Spurgeon and Janet Smith brought the house down, or rather up to its feet, and a tear to this writer's eye at one point.

Over $4000 was raised for local Habitat for Humanity projects.  See you next year, same time, same place.

NT Wright on the Resurrection

Nobody, including Jesus's followers, was expecting one person to be bodily raised from the dead in the middle of history. The stories of the Resurrection are certainly not “wish-fulfilments” or the result of what dodgy social science calls “cognitive dissonance”. First-century Jews who followed would-be messiahs knew that if your leader got killed by the authorities, it meant you had backed the wrong man. You then had a choice: give up the revolution or get yourself a new leader. Going around saying that he'd been raised from the dead wasn't an option.

Unless he had been. Jesus of Nazareth was certainly dead by the Friday evening; Roman soldiers were professional killers and wouldn't have allowed a not-quite-dead rebel leader to stay that way for long. When the first Christians told the story of what happened next, they were not saying: “I think he's still with us in a spiritual sense” or “I think he's gone to heaven”. All these have been suggested by people who have lost their historical and theological nerve.

The historian must explain why Christianity got going in the first place, why it hailed Jesus as Messiah despite His execution (He hadn't defeated the pagans, or rebuilt the Temple, or brought justice and peace to the world, all of which a Messiah should have done), and why the early Christian movement took the shape that it did. The only explanation that will fit the evidence is the one the early Christians insisted upon - He really had been raised from the dead. His body was not just reanimated. It was transformed, so that it was no longer subject to sickness and death.

Let's be clear: the stories are not about someone coming back into the present mode of life. They are about someone going on into a new sort of existence, still emphatically bodily, if anything, more so.

Full text here.
NT Wright is Bishop of Durham

on preparing the bread & wine for Maundy Thursday

We have seen bread before.  Almost 40 days ago we heard the words of the tempter:  “If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become bread.”  Jesus will not turn stones into bread.  Instead, in his hands bread becomes something greater.  He has answered Satan once again.  For who else but the Son of God can take this bread and make it something greater? 

We have seen wine before.  At the wedding feast of Cana in Galillee, Jesus took water and changed it into wine.  Recall his words at that time:  my hour has not yet come.  Tonight his hour has come:  But what does Jesus do?  He takes the cup of wine and makes it into something better.  This is the cup of the new covenant in His blood. 

And still the words of the steward of the feast echo in our ears: 

“You have saved the best wine until now.”

On the limits of metaphors

It seems to me that the further back in religious history one goes, the more acceptable it is to apply the "metaphor" principle to an event.  Or rather, perhaps I should say in all fairness, a supposed event.  Take, for example, the idea that the resurrection of Jesus was only a "metaphorical" event.  A teaching kind of story, like the fable or fairy tale with a moral, a lesson to be learned.  Now there are certainly good stories with good lessons, even inspiring stories with inspiring lessons.  Perhaps this is one of them.  Would it matter?

I think that it is of course much safer to apply the metaphor principle to events distant in time.  However, I see no compelling reason why, for example, I shouldn't tell you that Mother Teresa never cared for the poor.  After all, the stories you have heard about Mother Teresa are really just that - inspiring stories with a moral, designed to teach you and inspire you.  Actually, she never lifted a finger to do the things which you think she did.  She simply read an inspiring story (which never happened in physical reality), and decided that the proper response was to create a new inspiring story (which never happened in reality)...

To be continued...  Really. 

BTW, what do you think of this video (h/t Pete Rollins)

And if you are looking for more, you might want to check out this event here in Edmonton, which I think will provide lots of food for thought & discussion:

Borg-Crossan Seminar: On October 30th and 31st, 2009, distinguished biblical scholars, Drs. Marcus Borg and John Dominic Crossan, will present a seminar, entitled “Jesus and the Call to Discipleship”, as part of Christ Church’s Centennial Celebrations. Borg and Crossan have written and lectured extensively on Jesus and the challenges of taking His message into our world. Registration for the seminar is $100, and must be received by June 30th, 2009. A limited number of tickets for a seminar and private dinner with the presenters on October 31st, at the Faculty Club, are also available for $275/person.

Partnering with the Council of the North, one parish at a time

Rita lives on the Red Earth Reserve, about three hours northeast of Prince Albert. There are around 2,000 people living on the Reserve, with a large population of children and youth. Rita herself has six children, 32 grandchildren, and 20 great-grandchildren. Many families on the Red Earth Reserve struggle with poverty, although Rita describes the conditions as “not too poor, compared to some other places.” St. Stephen’s Anglican Church, where Rita serves, is a small building that is only heated for services. “I often arrive first to start the fire,” she notes when asked about the cold winter days.

The people of St. Timothy’s Church in Edmonton were moved by a presentation at their Synod last year about the conditions of many Reserves, and that the clergy there are not paid for their ministry work. The ACW group of the church offered to become a partner with Rita and her work at Red Earth, and raised $500 to help out. When they challenged their congregation to match this amount, they were thrilled to see it more than triple!

From the diocese of Saskatchewan website.

I mention this for a couple of reasons.  First, I think it vitally important that local parishes have partnerships with other parishes.  And I do want to stress the word partnership.  This is a time when there is much fraction and division within our Anglican family.  And no, I don't bury my head in the sand (or snow, if you are more northern) and pretend that these difficulties do not exist, or that they are going to magically disappear any time soon.  But at the same time that need not prevent us from, well, loving our neighbours in the most practical and sincere ways we can.

Second, I wanted to thank all the members of St Timothy's, Edmonton, for supporting this work, and understanding that they are part of a larger family of Anglicans.  I suspect that many of us act as if we are a congregational style church. "Me in my small corner, and you in yours" - as the old hymn used to say.  But that vision of church is, I think, not true to the vision of Christ, nor of the apostles, nor of the Fathers.  And while we may not, as individual parishes, find ourselves able to solve all the questions of ecclesiological confusion, we are able, as individual parishes, to exercise our commitment to be part of the larger family.

Third, I think it is a visible reminder, not that such parishes as St Stephen's "need" parishes like St Tim's.  Rather, I really think it works the other way around.  We at St Timothy's would be poorer as a church without developing a partnership with a parish like St Stephen's.  Our diocesan Dean recently returned from a visit to another Canadian Council of the North diocese, and we think there might be more opportunities to share resources - human, spiritual, financial.

Draw your church together, Lord into one great company of disciples, together following our Lord Jesus Christ into every walk of life, together serving Him in His mission to the world, and  together witnessing to His love on every continent and island, through the power of the Holy Spirit.

lenten series: Bernard of Clairvaux On Loving God, pt 5

So then in the beginning man loves God, not for God's sake, but for his own. It is something for him to know how little he can do by himself and how much by God's help, and in that knowledge to order himself rightly towards God, his sure support.

But when tribulations, recurring again and again, constrain him to turn to God for unfailing help, would not even a heart as hard as iron, as cold as marble, be softened by the goodness of such a Savior, so that he would love God not altogether selfishly, but because He is God?

Bernard of Clairvaux - On Loving God ch. ix

In the first degree of love, we love God for "self's sake".  That is, we love God for what God can do for us.  We are pleased to receive God's benefits and blessings, and as we do so we are drawn to love Him.  But will we still love God when "tribulations, recurring again and again" break upon us? This is the movement from loving God because of His benefits presently enjoyed, to loving God because of His care for us in the midst of troubles.  As Bernard puts it, can we begin to love God simply "because He is God"?

Bernard also gives us a way of approaching hardships in life.  They are redeemable in that we begin to seek God despite them.  It is analogous to the marriage vow of loving "for better, for worse".  The test of love does not come in the better, in comes in the worse.  The analogy breaks down when we realize that it is not the Beloved who has become worse, only the circumstances of our lives.  It is God's presence in hardship and despite hardship which begins to fashion in us a newer and deeper degree of love. 

Let frequent troubles drive us to frequent supplications; and surely, tasting, we must see how gracious the Lord is (Ps. 34.8). Thereupon His goodness once realized draws us to love Him unselfishly, yet more than our own needs impel us to love Him selfishly: even as the Samaritans told the woman who announced that it was Christ who was at the well: `Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard Him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the savior of the world' (John 4.42). 

This is a fairly interesting use of the story of the woman at the well.  In a figurative interpretation, Bernard says that our "need" functions like the woman - they announce to us the presence of Christ. Then a deeper part of us replies that we can see and love God better; not simply because our needs announced that they were being looked after.  Loving God for the sake of our "needs" impels us to love selfishly;  we will love only as long as our "needs" are met.  But as God meets those needs He also draws us onward in a place of "troubles".

I don't find it clear from the text that God creates the troubles, merely that He uses them for this higher purpose.  Nor is it clear that God's response is merely to change our circumstances again to what they were.  Rather, the goal seems to be to recognize God's goodness in the midst of hardships.  And I might say, from my own limited experience, that is quite a leap to make.  But worth it if it is made...

Lenten post series on Bernard of Clairvaux here

Which, btw, seems to missing post #4, but that is a mystery which I will need to address another time...

There's a mission field in your own backyard

I’m excited about planting seeds, and so I’m watching the local weather forecast these days.  And for good reason:  it’s all tied to my latest long term mission project.  Fortunately I don’t have to raise too many funds for travel with this project;  just walk about 15 feet past our garage.  You see, there’s a mission field right in your own backyard.  Or at least there is in mine.

We have a modest house on a reasonably sized lot.  Every winter for the past number of years we’ve continued one of those great Canadian traditions:  the backyard rink.  In an era when fewer and fewer neighbours get to know each other, the backyard rink is a magnet for kids (and their dads) to get together.  Nothing beats a game of dads against kids on a backyard rink. It comes complete with the requisite hot chocolate and “running up the score” on some fathers who just can’t quite seem to stop the puck from going in the net. I suppose some might think it unfair that one net is only four feet wide, while the other net happens to be the entire width of the Dads’ end of the rink. You can almost hear the ground itself cry out:  “I am CANADIAN”.  It’s a place where you can build community, build relationships, and find a relaxed venue in which to share some things – including your faith – with your neighbours.  Sometimes mission is just that simple.

Which brings me back to the weather forecast.  In spring, summer and fall the big rectangle at the side of the garage serves as a vegetable garden. I think this year we will try to host a bit of a community garden.   Neighbourhood corn boil anyone?  Let the neighbours bring the butter, and you can be the salt of the earth.

I’m excited about planting seeds.

the Sheepcat: "A Changed Heart"

...I came out to my friends and family. The column on gay and lesbian issues I wrote in the mid-80s was one of the first of its kind in a student newspaper in Canada. I represented the Waterloo student group on Toronto's Gay Community Dance Committee, which organized fundraising dances at the (Lord, have mercy!) Masonic Temple. I joined in countless marches and demonstrations for gay rights. You've heard of disco bunnies, who spent all their time on the dance floor; my lover's roommate aptly pegged me as a "Movement bunny."

...I realized I needed to examine whether gay sex was compatible with living a life wholly devoted to Christ. I finally concluded that it wasn't, at which time the break I'd been taking from sex with guys turned permanent.

I came to think of myself as a celibate gay man and later to renounce altogether the gay identity that had once been fundamental to my self-image.

From the Sheepcat's blog.  This selection is from "part 1".  There is also a "part 2" and he writes that a "part 3" is coming soon. 

I've known the Sheepcat (both online and in person) for several years and consider him a friend.  Blessings in Christ.

Jon Buller, I never said thank you

Canadian musician Steve Bell was in town recently with a few friends:  jazz pianist Mike Janzen & singer/songwriter Jon Buller.  The local date of the tour also included some numbers by the newly signed Kerri Woelke. 

I love Steve Bell's easy story-telling style.  He weaves music and memories together.  I was tempted to say "at his performances", but I have never had the sense that his shows/concerts are performances.  He has an unmatched stage presence. 

I was really delighted to hear Jon Buller again.  I had the privilege of working with him many years ago for a one-off weekend event in Winnipeg - he provided the music for a regional event & I think I came up some sort of talks/events, under the auspices of some great folks from the local Anglican diocese.  I had never listened to his music prior to that event, and picked up a couple of his CDs.  One of his songs has had a special place in my heart for a long time.  It was just around the time that we received the news that SJ was suffering from congestive heart failure in the womb, among many other probable medical difficulties.  Shortly thereafter we received new that SJ also was likely to live with Down Syndrome, should she come to term.

We went home and my wife went to sleep.  I remember wanting to pray, but not knowing where to begin.  For some reason I put on one of Jon's CDs, and played a track called "Lord How Excellent".  It is based on Psalm 8

When I look at your heavens, the work of your fingers,
   the moon and the stars that you have established;
what are human beings that you are mindful of them,
   mortals that you care for them?

O Lord how excellent is your name in all the earth.

The song itself speaks of praising God in the midst of difficulties, remembering that there is healing in the act of praise.  Jon helped me through that night, and many nights to come.

Thank you.

Quote of the day: Michael Spencer in the CSM

Christian music, publishing, and media has produced a culture of young Christians who know next to nothing about their own faith except how they feel about it.

from this article
Michael Spencer is known to bloggers as the Internet Monk

at least one reason why

I like to write sermons in coffee shops.

I'm meeting up with a fellow who lost his 14 year old daughter to cancer this week.

if you really want to understand about tax collectors

I've seen a lot of press in the blogs about Ted Haggard.  If you don't know who he is, you don't have to.  But if you do, imagine Jesus inviting Ted Haggard to be one of the 12.  No, not inviting him before, inviting him now.

I think then it might begin to dawn on us.